Qwen3.8 27B vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

At a Glance

Compare
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#30 of 4654.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.0–69.4UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#16 of 44$0.072 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#17 of 3854.8 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 45.8–62.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.20Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026$1.25Google AI · Aug 29, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$2.50Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026$10.00Google AI · Aug 29, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K1,049K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Aug 29, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkQwen3.8-27BGemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,439.2799% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1432.84410050, 1445.69542028]; votes 10697; rank 681,457.77100% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1455.30542635, 1460.23799206]; votes 122554; rank 36
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie1,272.12100% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1262.21853873, 1282.01179703]; votes 4577; rank 351,262.1799% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1257.50456844, 1266.82595195]; votes 87635; rank 45
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie0 benchmark winsNo overall winner1 benchmark winNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldQwen3.8-27BGemini 2.5 Pro
DeveloperQwenGoogle DeepMind
FamilyQwen3 8 27bGemini 2 5
ModelQwen3.8-27BGemini 2.5 Pro
VersionQwen3.8-27BGemini 2.5 Pro
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknownUnknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2025-01-01
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video, Audio, Document
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K1,049K
Total parameters27.8BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

Qwen3.8 27B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDQwen/Qwen3.8-27B

Gemini 2.5 Pro Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-2.5-pro

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.8 27B vs Gemini 2.5 Pro FAQs

Is Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 27B and Gemini 2.5 Pro, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+

Qwen3.8 27B is $0.20 and Gemini 2.5 Pro is $1.25 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.8 27B is $2.50 and Gemini 2.5 Pro is $10.00 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+

Gemini 2.5 Pro has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 27B supports 262K and Gemini 2.5 Pro supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro be self-hosted?+

Qwen3.8 27B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Qwen3.8 27B is open weight; Gemini 2.5 Pro is not marked open weight.

Can Qwen3.8 27B and Gemini 2.5 Pro understand images?+

Qwen3.8 27B is documented with image input; Gemini 2.5 Pro is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+

Qwen3.8 27B has the larger sourced maximum output: Qwen3.8 27B supports 131K and Gemini 2.5 Pro supports 66K output tokens.

Do Qwen3.8 27B and Gemini 2.5 Pro support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.8 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemini 2.5 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+

Qwen3.8 27B has 3 sourced provider routes; Gemini 2.5 Pro has 2, so Qwen3.8 27B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback